Here's the first of three films I will be posting.
The Care Package: Cattle Welfare in the West from ExploreBeef on Vimeo.
Showing posts with label Animal Welfare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Animal Welfare. Show all posts
Saturday, November 27, 2010
The Care Package: Cattle Welfare in the West
Three student filmmakers were recently given full access to makes short documentaries about the beef industry. As we travel across the country speaking about agriculture I continue to tell people they shouldn't ask Google about where their food comes from. They should ask the farmers and ranchers that grow it. These films offer an opportunity for everyone to learn about beef industry directly from the people involved.
Here's the first of three films I will be posting.
Here's the first of three films I will be posting.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
OH Livestock Board Drafts First Proposal
Wednesday, October 6, 2010, 1:21pm EDT
Ohio's Livestock Care board drafts 1st set of rules
http://www.bizjournals.com/
The voter-approved Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board is taking its first steps in drafting new rules to govern the treatment of animals in the state.
The board this week voted to create new standards on livestock euthanasia, marking the first time such guidelines have been established in Ohio. Specifics of the new euthanasia rules must be OK’d by a committee before going into effect and are posted here for a two-week public comment period.
The proposed euthanasia rules not only define the term itself but establish acceptable methods for horses, chickens, pigs, cattle and other farm animals based on weight and other conditions. Violators are subject to civil penalties, according to the approved draft.
The issue of more humane methods of euthanasia for animals in the state was a key sticking point in a standoff between state officials and the Humane Society of the U.S., which earlier this year was planning a ballot issue that would have bound the Livestock Care Standards Board to implement specific rules if passed. The activist group and state officials brokered a compromise in June that kept the issue from heading to the ballot and ensured the board, created with voter approval last year, would hand down regulations on dog breeding kennels, cockfighting and exotic animals. The state also has agreed to phase out so-called gestation crates used by the pork industry.
Robert Boggs, director of the state Agriculture Department, said in a release that the proposed euthanasia rules are designed to be “clear and practical for Ohio’s livestock producers.” Link
Ohio's Livestock Care board drafts 1st set of rules
http://www.bizjournals.com/
The voter-approved Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board is taking its first steps in drafting new rules to govern the treatment of animals in the state.
The board this week voted to create new standards on livestock euthanasia, marking the first time such guidelines have been established in Ohio. Specifics of the new euthanasia rules must be OK’d by a committee before going into effect and are posted here for a two-week public comment period.
The proposed euthanasia rules not only define the term itself but establish acceptable methods for horses, chickens, pigs, cattle and other farm animals based on weight and other conditions. Violators are subject to civil penalties, according to the approved draft.
The issue of more humane methods of euthanasia for animals in the state was a key sticking point in a standoff between state officials and the Humane Society of the U.S., which earlier this year was planning a ballot issue that would have bound the Livestock Care Standards Board to implement specific rules if passed. The activist group and state officials brokered a compromise in June that kept the issue from heading to the ballot and ensured the board, created with voter approval last year, would hand down regulations on dog breeding kennels, cockfighting and exotic animals. The state also has agreed to phase out so-called gestation crates used by the pork industry.
Robert Boggs, director of the state Agriculture Department, said in a release that the proposed euthanasia rules are designed to be “clear and practical for Ohio’s livestock producers.” Link
These are the first regulations to come out of the newly formed Livestock Care Board. Regardless of how beneficial they are for farmers and ranchers, what remains to be seen is if the HSUS will approve of them. From here on out, any regulations the board approves will also have to be approved by the HSUS or they will start reminding everyone how they have enough signatures to go back to the ballot and force whatever they see fit. There are certainly differing opinions about the compromise that was made in June but we do know one thing for sure, HSUS will hold the state hostage until they get everything they want. Like a gun to Ohio ’s head, those ill-gotten signatures will have more affect on the outcome of Ohio
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Proposed GIPSA Rule Could Reduce Welfare
NCBA Echoes Temple Grandin’s Animal Welfare Concerns
10/04/2010 03:40PM
CattleNetwork.com
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration’s (GIPSA) proposed rule on livestock marketing poses concerns to animal welfare, according to the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA). The Obama Administration's proposed rule would ban packer-to-packers sales of livestock causing many to question the impact to the welfare of livestock. Colin Woodall, NCBA vice president of government affairs, said eliminating packer-to-packer sales would have several unintended consequences such as animal welfare.
“Let’s say that there is a beef packer located in the Pacific Northwest that also owns a feedlot in Southwest Kansas. Under this proposal, that company would be required to ship all of its Kansas feedlot cattle to Washington State for processing, which subjects those cattle to an additional 1,600 miles of travel,” said Woodall
Woodall also said the packer-to-packer ban would especially hurt smaller producers, dealers and packers. He said the ban would encourage consolidation and displace producer livestock.
“In addition, those cattle that traveled from Kansas to Washington State would displace the local cattle that typically supply that plant,” said Woodall. “The proposal would add inefficiencies for the feedlot through added transportation costs, which could result in the sale or liquidation of that feedlot, thereby driving consolidation and less competition.”
Colorado State University professor and world renowned animal welfare expert, Temple Grandin, wrote USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack offering her concerns about the well-being of livestock if the proposed rule requires packers to market and sell livestock through dealers is implemented. Beyond stress to livestock that would occur if this rule is implemented, Grandin is also concerned that the proposed rule would complicate and compromise the effectiveness of many established animal welfare-certification programs by requiring another level of paperwork and recordkeeping to track the additional transactions.
“As a scientist who has dedicated her life to improving livestock welfare, I am extremely alarmed that although this rule is concerned with marketing and competition, the department ultimately responsible for it – USDA – is also charged with enforcing the Humane Slaughter Act and apparently has paid so little attention to the animal welfare implications of this proposal,” Grandin stated in the letter. Link
10/04/2010 03:40PM
CattleNetwork.com
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration’s (GIPSA) proposed rule on livestock marketing poses concerns to animal welfare, according to the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA). The Obama Administration's proposed rule would ban packer-to-packers sales of livestock causing many to question the impact to the welfare of livestock. Colin Woodall, NCBA vice president of government affairs, said eliminating packer-to-packer sales would have several unintended consequences such as animal welfare.
“Let’s say that there is a beef packer located in the Pacific Northwest that also owns a feedlot in Southwest Kansas. Under this proposal, that company would be required to ship all of its Kansas feedlot cattle to Washington State for processing, which subjects those cattle to an additional 1,600 miles of travel,” said Woodall
Woodall also said the packer-to-packer ban would especially hurt smaller producers, dealers and packers. He said the ban would encourage consolidation and displace producer livestock.
“In addition, those cattle that traveled from Kansas to Washington State would displace the local cattle that typically supply that plant,” said Woodall. “The proposal would add inefficiencies for the feedlot through added transportation costs, which could result in the sale or liquidation of that feedlot, thereby driving consolidation and less competition.”
Colorado State University professor and world renowned animal welfare expert, Temple Grandin, wrote USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack offering her concerns about the well-being of livestock if the proposed rule requires packers to market and sell livestock through dealers is implemented. Beyond stress to livestock that would occur if this rule is implemented, Grandin is also concerned that the proposed rule would complicate and compromise the effectiveness of many established animal welfare-certification programs by requiring another level of paperwork and recordkeeping to track the additional transactions.
“As a scientist who has dedicated her life to improving livestock welfare, I am extremely alarmed that although this rule is concerned with marketing and competition, the department ultimately responsible for it – USDA – is also charged with enforcing the Humane Slaughter Act and apparently has paid so little attention to the animal welfare implications of this proposal,” Grandin stated in the letter. Link
The GIPSA rule proposal has certainly been cussed and discussed throughout the beef industry. The unintended consequences of this proposal seem to be mounting though. Temple Grandin
Thursday, April 15, 2010
McDonalds Opposes Cage-Free Eggs
April 13, 2010, 3:49 pm
McDonald’s Board Opposes Cage-Free Eggs for U.S.
By LEORA BROYDO VESTEL
The board of directors of McDonald’s has recommended that the company’s shareholders vote against a proposal to require that 5 percent of the eggs purchased for the chain’s restaurants in the United States be the cage-free variety.
Sally Ryan for The New York Times Eggs are washed, rinsed and coated in a thin layer of oil to protect their porous shells before they are dried and packaged at a cage-free supplier in Indiana.
The proposal was advanced by the Humane Society of the United States.
Some major fast food companies, including Burger King, Subway and Wendy’s, and the retailers Wal-Mart and Trader Joe’s, have already made some level of commitment to purchasing or selling cage-free eggs.
But the McDonald’s board said on Friday that the science was not there to support a switch.
“As we have examined this issue over the years, we have determined that there is no agreement in the global scientific community about how to balance the advantages and disadvantages of laying hen housing systems,” it said in a proxy statement. Read More
It’s nice to see a company not cave to emotional pleas, but rather rely on scientific evidence to make sound decisions. Obviously, the animal rights activists don’t want companies to study the issues since the answer might not match their agenda. Shouldn’t this be a warning sign not to trust these groups that shun studying animals welfare in favor of bullying people into agreeing with them?
McDonald’s Board Opposes Cage-Free Eggs for U.S.
By LEORA BROYDO VESTEL
The board of directors of McDonald’s has recommended that the company’s shareholders vote against a proposal to require that 5 percent of the eggs purchased for the chain’s restaurants in the United States be the cage-free variety.
Sally Ryan for The New York Times Eggs are washed, rinsed and coated in a thin layer of oil to protect their porous shells before they are dried and packaged at a cage-free supplier in Indiana.
The proposal was advanced by the Humane Society of the United States.
Some major fast food companies, including Burger King, Subway and Wendy’s, and the retailers Wal-Mart and Trader Joe’s, have already made some level of commitment to purchasing or selling cage-free eggs.
But the McDonald’s board said on Friday that the science was not there to support a switch.
“As we have examined this issue over the years, we have determined that there is no agreement in the global scientific community about how to balance the advantages and disadvantages of laying hen housing systems,” it said in a proxy statement. Read More
It’s nice to see a company not cave to emotional pleas, but rather rely on scientific evidence to make sound decisions. Obviously, the animal rights activists don’t want companies to study the issues since the answer might not match their agenda. Shouldn’t this be a warning sign not to trust these groups that shun studying animals welfare in favor of bullying people into agreeing with them?
Telling/Showing Consumers What We Do
CSUF speaker backs video at livestock operations
Posted at 09:07 PM on Monday, Apr. 12, 2010
By Robert Rodriguez / The Fresno Bee
Live video feeds of a livestock operation may seem like a far-fetched idea to gain the confidence of consumers and retailers.
But animal science expert Temple Grandin says that if that's what it takes, it's worth the effort.
Grandin, who spoke Monday at Fresno State to more than 500 students, community members and faculty, is a professor of animal science at Colorado State University who is recognized throughout the world as one of the leaders in humane animal handling practices.
She says animal welfare is of growing importance to retailers and major chain restaurants, such as McDonald's.
Animal rights activists are using the Internet to post videos of livestock animals being mistreated and abused. And while she finds those practices to be horrible, Grandin said farmers need to do a better job of communicating with the public about their animal handling practices.
Many in the audience agreed.
"We need to own up to anything that we do that is wrong," said Jon Dolieslager, an auctioneer at the Tulare County Stockyard in Dinuba. "But a lot of what we do is right, and people need to know that." Read More
So what are you doing to share the good things you do in agriculture with consumers? There are plenty of ways to do it, whether it’s in person or online, the most important thing is that everyone is doing something. The good news is that it can be a really simple thing to do as well. Make sure to put it on your chore list.
Posted at 09:07 PM on Monday, Apr. 12, 2010
By Robert Rodriguez / The Fresno Bee
Live video feeds of a livestock operation may seem like a far-fetched idea to gain the confidence of consumers and retailers.
But animal science expert Temple Grandin says that if that's what it takes, it's worth the effort.
Grandin, who spoke Monday at Fresno State to more than 500 students, community members and faculty, is a professor of animal science at Colorado State University who is recognized throughout the world as one of the leaders in humane animal handling practices.
She says animal welfare is of growing importance to retailers and major chain restaurants, such as McDonald's.
Animal rights activists are using the Internet to post videos of livestock animals being mistreated and abused. And while she finds those practices to be horrible, Grandin said farmers need to do a better job of communicating with the public about their animal handling practices.
Many in the audience agreed.
"We need to own up to anything that we do that is wrong," said Jon Dolieslager, an auctioneer at the Tulare County Stockyard in Dinuba. "But a lot of what we do is right, and people need to know that." Read More
So what are you doing to share the good things you do in agriculture with consumers? There are plenty of ways to do it, whether it’s in person or online, the most important thing is that everyone is doing something. The good news is that it can be a really simple thing to do as well. Make sure to put it on your chore list.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
HSUS Kicks Off OH Ballot Initiative
Animal Standards Fight Restarts in Ohio
03/14/2010
NAFB News Service
Hoosier Ag Today
The Ohio House voted 90 to 0 last week to establish the Ohio Livestock Standards Board. At the same time, Wayne Pacelle was in Ohio to kick off another constitutional ballot issue. The issue, backed by the Humane Society of the United States, would require the farm standards board to ban - extreme confinement - of pigs, chickens and other animals for most of their lives, prohibit using sick or injured cows for human consumption, and eliminate inhumane euthanasia methods.
Under the program, farm owners or operators would be barred from - tethering or confining any calf raised for veal, pig during pregnancy, or egg-laying hen, on a farm, for all or the majority of any day, in a manner that prevents such animal from lying down, standing up, fully extending his or her limbs, or turning around freely. A half-dozen exceptions are listed, including ones for fairs, rodeos and 4-H shows.
If 402,275 valid signatures of Ohio registered voters are collected by June 29, the proposal will be placed on the November ballot as a statewide constitutional issue. Pacelle expects to have, “thousands of volunteers hitting the streets - to gather signatures.” The Ohio Farm Bureau and other agricultural organizations that supported Issue 2 last fall have vowed to fight the HSUS proposal. Link
Not wanting to leave the issue of animal welfare and care in the hands of professionals and experts, Wayne Pacelle (who was a history major in college) and the HSUS is launching their ballot initiative in Ohio. They want to force the newly approved and not yet formed Livestock Care Standards Board to accept certain guidelines based on pure emotion and little science. Fortunately it appears that the citizens of Ohio are quite aware that farmers and ranchers are the real experts on animal care. It will be essential to keep the momentum gained from last years vote carrying forward.
03/14/2010
NAFB News Service
Hoosier Ag Today
The Ohio House voted 90 to 0 last week to establish the Ohio Livestock Standards Board. At the same time, Wayne Pacelle was in Ohio to kick off another constitutional ballot issue. The issue, backed by the Humane Society of the United States, would require the farm standards board to ban - extreme confinement - of pigs, chickens and other animals for most of their lives, prohibit using sick or injured cows for human consumption, and eliminate inhumane euthanasia methods.
Under the program, farm owners or operators would be barred from - tethering or confining any calf raised for veal, pig during pregnancy, or egg-laying hen, on a farm, for all or the majority of any day, in a manner that prevents such animal from lying down, standing up, fully extending his or her limbs, or turning around freely. A half-dozen exceptions are listed, including ones for fairs, rodeos and 4-H shows.
If 402,275 valid signatures of Ohio registered voters are collected by June 29, the proposal will be placed on the November ballot as a statewide constitutional issue. Pacelle expects to have, “thousands of volunteers hitting the streets - to gather signatures.” The Ohio Farm Bureau and other agricultural organizations that supported Issue 2 last fall have vowed to fight the HSUS proposal. Link
Not wanting to leave the issue of animal welfare and care in the hands of professionals and experts, Wayne Pacelle (who was a history major in college) and the HSUS is launching their ballot initiative in Ohio. They want to force the newly approved and not yet formed Livestock Care Standards Board to accept certain guidelines based on pure emotion and little science. Fortunately it appears that the citizens of Ohio are quite aware that farmers and ranchers are the real experts on animal care. It will be essential to keep the momentum gained from last years vote carrying forward.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Five Minutes With Wayne Pacelle
Jolley: Five Minutes With Wayne Pacelle & The HSUS Controversies
03/05/2010 08:43AM
The last time I interviewed Wayne Pacelle, it was done by phone; a lengthy conversation that took considerably longer than five minutes. This time, when Rachel Querry, his senior director of communications, contacted me and asked if I might be interested in talking with him again, I was of two minds.
First, as a follow up to the David Martosko interview that took HSUS to task for their involvement in the Ringling Brothers suit – an effort that was thrown out of court after almost a decade of high-priced legal wrangling and resulted in the most famous Circus in the world hitting back with a RICO suit – absolutely I was interested! I thought it might make for a fascinating response to the charges leveled by Martosko.
Second, with so much HSUS stuff going on – the news has been chock full of tidbits about things like Prop 2, puppy mills and farrowing crates to name just a few – I didn’t want any misunderstanding between what was asked and what was said to taint the interview. I suggested I submit the questions in writing and Pacelle respond to them the same way. After a quick check, Querry said he would agree.
A few other points about this interview: The judge who dismissed the case against Ringling Brothers did so because he said the main witness against the circus was paid almost $200,000 which puts the validity of his testimony in serious question. Pacelle says he’s disappointed that the case was dismissed on a technical issue and there was a lot of additional testimony backing their claims.
The horse case I asked about has an interesting back story. Denisa Mallott, the woman at the center of the seizure, was first charged with 25 cases of felony abuse. Before the case made it to trial, though, the felony charges were dropped and she’s currently contesting a charge of one misdemeanor. Looking at some of the circumstances surrounding the seizure, I can only assume that an over anxious county sheriff mishandled the case from the start and Mallott is guilty of keeping horses in conditions made muddy by 18 inches of rain, the 100 feet of dry, covered space be damned. More on this one later.
As you read through this interview, you’ll notice several links. To better understand the context of the questions and the answers, please click on those links and read the background materials.
Read More
It’s been interesting watching the HSUS and Wayne Pacelle struggling to defend their organization in so many places at once. They have been unable to generate very few grassroots supporters of their group for online commenting. Instead they have been using paid employees to search for news articles about the HSUS and leave their tired talking points in the comment section. Pacelle himself has had to do several interviews like this in an attempt to minimize the damage being caused by farmers, ranchers, hunters and pet owners when they share the truth about the HSUS with others. I find it a bit humorous how he tries to portray the HSUS, the wealthiest vegan, animal rights group in the world, as being a victim. Pacelle claims to want constructive dialog with ag leaders, but the truth is that farmers and ranchers just need to be having constructive dialog with consumers of their products and then the HSUS become irrelevant.
03/05/2010 08:43AM
The last time I interviewed Wayne Pacelle, it was done by phone; a lengthy conversation that took considerably longer than five minutes. This time, when Rachel Querry, his senior director of communications, contacted me and asked if I might be interested in talking with him again, I was of two minds.
First, as a follow up to the David Martosko interview that took HSUS to task for their involvement in the Ringling Brothers suit – an effort that was thrown out of court after almost a decade of high-priced legal wrangling and resulted in the most famous Circus in the world hitting back with a RICO suit – absolutely I was interested! I thought it might make for a fascinating response to the charges leveled by Martosko.
Second, with so much HSUS stuff going on – the news has been chock full of tidbits about things like Prop 2, puppy mills and farrowing crates to name just a few – I didn’t want any misunderstanding between what was asked and what was said to taint the interview. I suggested I submit the questions in writing and Pacelle respond to them the same way. After a quick check, Querry said he would agree.
A few other points about this interview: The judge who dismissed the case against Ringling Brothers did so because he said the main witness against the circus was paid almost $200,000 which puts the validity of his testimony in serious question. Pacelle says he’s disappointed that the case was dismissed on a technical issue and there was a lot of additional testimony backing their claims.
The horse case I asked about has an interesting back story. Denisa Mallott, the woman at the center of the seizure, was first charged with 25 cases of felony abuse. Before the case made it to trial, though, the felony charges were dropped and she’s currently contesting a charge of one misdemeanor. Looking at some of the circumstances surrounding the seizure, I can only assume that an over anxious county sheriff mishandled the case from the start and Mallott is guilty of keeping horses in conditions made muddy by 18 inches of rain, the 100 feet of dry, covered space be damned. More on this one later.
As you read through this interview, you’ll notice several links. To better understand the context of the questions and the answers, please click on those links and read the background materials.
Read More
It’s been interesting watching the HSUS and Wayne Pacelle struggling to defend their organization in so many places at once. They have been unable to generate very few grassroots supporters of their group for online commenting. Instead they have been using paid employees to search for news articles about the HSUS and leave their tired talking points in the comment section. Pacelle himself has had to do several interviews like this in an attempt to minimize the damage being caused by farmers, ranchers, hunters and pet owners when they share the truth about the HSUS with others. I find it a bit humorous how he tries to portray the HSUS, the wealthiest vegan, animal rights group in the world, as being a victim. Pacelle claims to want constructive dialog with ag leaders, but the truth is that farmers and ranchers just need to be having constructive dialog with consumers of their products and then the HSUS become irrelevant.
Swiss Voters Reject Legal Standing for Animals
Swiss voters reject lawyers for animals in referendum
Swiss voters have overwhelmingly rejected a controversial plan to appoint lawyers for animals.
By Alexandra Williams in Geneva
Published: 12:33AM GMT 08 Mar 2010
All of the 26 Swiss cantons on Sunday voted against the proposal by animal rights activists to extend nationwide a system already in place in Zurich.
Overall, just 29.5 per cent of voters were in favour. In seven cantons the "No" vote was more than 80 per cent.
The Alpine country already has among the most stringent animal rights laws in the world.
It recently changed its constitution to protect the "dignity" of plant life and made a law last year establishing rights for creatures such as goldfish and canaries. Pigs, budgies and other social creatures cannot be kept alone; horses and cows must be regularly exercised outside their stalls and dog owners are required to take a training course to learn how to properly care for their pets.
If citizens had voted for the initiative, each canton would have appointed a lawyer to act on behalf of animals at taxpayers' expense. Read More
Last week I shared with you that this vote was taking place. I’m happy to share with you that the attempt to give legal standing to animals in Switzerland failed miserably.
Swiss voters have overwhelmingly rejected a controversial plan to appoint lawyers for animals.
By Alexandra Williams in Geneva
Published: 12:33AM GMT 08 Mar 2010
All of the 26 Swiss cantons on Sunday voted against the proposal by animal rights activists to extend nationwide a system already in place in Zurich.
Overall, just 29.5 per cent of voters were in favour. In seven cantons the "No" vote was more than 80 per cent.
The Alpine country already has among the most stringent animal rights laws in the world.
It recently changed its constitution to protect the "dignity" of plant life and made a law last year establishing rights for creatures such as goldfish and canaries. Pigs, budgies and other social creatures cannot be kept alone; horses and cows must be regularly exercised outside their stalls and dog owners are required to take a training course to learn how to properly care for their pets.
If citizens had voted for the initiative, each canton would have appointed a lawyer to act on behalf of animals at taxpayers' expense. Read More
Last week I shared with you that this vote was taking place. I’m happy to share with you that the attempt to give legal standing to animals in Switzerland failed miserably.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Researching Animal Welfare
Researchers ask: Are caged chickens miserable?
'Researchers ask: Are caged chickens miserable?';
By MICHAEL J. CRUMB Associated Press Writer
Published: Thursday, November 19, 2009 at 4:11 a.m. Last Modified: Thursday, November 19, 2009 at 4:11 a.m.
DES MOINES, Iowa - Are cramped chickens crazy chickens?
Researchers are trying to answer that question through several studies that intend to take emotions out of an angry debate between animal welfare groups and producers.
At issue are small cages, typically 24 inches wide by 25 1/2 inches deep, that can be shared by up to nine hens. About 96 percent of eggs sold in the United States come from hens who live in the so-called battery cages from the day they're born until their egg-laying days end 18 to 24 months later.
Public opinion appears to side with those who oppose the cages. Voters in California approved a proposition last year that bans cramped cages for hens. And Michigan's governor signed legislation last month requiring confined animals to have enough room to turn around and fully extend their limbs.
But even as Skewes and others conduct research, some question the need to study an issue they argue was resolved long ago.
Bruce Friedrich, a spokesman for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, said banning the cages is a solution to an obvious problem.
"Think about the ... effects of not moving for up to 24 months," Friedrich said. "Their bones and muscles waste away and they go insane."
Paul Shapiro, senior director of the Humane Society of the United States' Factory Farming Campaign, agreed.
"The egg industry is trying to muddy the waters by misleading people into believing that it's possible to confine birds in barren, tiny cages and have high welfare," he said. Read More
It seems that this article really shows the true colors of those of us in agriculture and those that are pushing an animal rights agenda. I have never heard anyone in agriculture speak against research that might further our knowledge of animal care like they are hoping to accomplish with this study. The HSUS and PETA, on the other hand, are upset that this study is going to be done. It’s disappointing, but not surprising that these animal rights groups aren’t interested in it.
'Researchers ask: Are caged chickens miserable?';
By MICHAEL J. CRUMB Associated Press Writer
Published: Thursday, November 19, 2009 at 4:11 a.m. Last Modified: Thursday, November 19, 2009 at 4:11 a.m.
DES MOINES, Iowa - Are cramped chickens crazy chickens?
Researchers are trying to answer that question through several studies that intend to take emotions out of an angry debate between animal welfare groups and producers.
At issue are small cages, typically 24 inches wide by 25 1/2 inches deep, that can be shared by up to nine hens. About 96 percent of eggs sold in the United States come from hens who live in the so-called battery cages from the day they're born until their egg-laying days end 18 to 24 months later.
Public opinion appears to side with those who oppose the cages. Voters in California approved a proposition last year that bans cramped cages for hens. And Michigan's governor signed legislation last month requiring confined animals to have enough room to turn around and fully extend their limbs.
But even as Skewes and others conduct research, some question the need to study an issue they argue was resolved long ago.
Bruce Friedrich, a spokesman for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, said banning the cages is a solution to an obvious problem.
"Think about the ... effects of not moving for up to 24 months," Friedrich said. "Their bones and muscles waste away and they go insane."
Paul Shapiro, senior director of the Humane Society of the United States' Factory Farming Campaign, agreed.
"The egg industry is trying to muddy the waters by misleading people into believing that it's possible to confine birds in barren, tiny cages and have high welfare," he said. Read More
It seems that this article really shows the true colors of those of us in agriculture and those that are pushing an animal rights agenda. I have never heard anyone in agriculture speak against research that might further our knowledge of animal care like they are hoping to accomplish with this study. The HSUS and PETA, on the other hand, are upset that this study is going to be done. It’s disappointing, but not surprising that these animal rights groups aren’t interested in it.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Animal Welfare In Modern Production
Speaker: Meat animals likely to stay in confinement settings
By ART HOVEY / Lincoln Journal Star Posted: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 8:00 pm
Despite increasing criticism from animal rights and welfare groups, Tim Amlaw doesn't expect to see the gates thrown open in livestock confinement settings in Nebraska and other prominent livestock states.
The typical chicken is not going back to scratching his way across the barnyard and the typical hog is not going back to burying himself up to his snout in his favorite mudhole.
Amid rising worldwide demand for food, "a concentrated system of production is going to be a necessity," Amlaw, based in Colorado as director of the farm animal program for American Humane, said in Lincoln Tuesday.
He expects demand to also dictate production systems "that keep costs reasonably low."
Amlaw's appearance at the 2009 Nebraska Cattlemen Beef Industry Issues Summit comes at a time when new laws in California, Michigan and other states are taking aim at cages for laying hens, gestation crates for pregnant hogs, and other tight spaces used for food animal production.
Read More
Reassuring consumers that our livestock are well cared for is always going to be an important thing. And every farmer or rancher that I know is always trying to make the care of their livestock even better. Modern livestock facilities can offer the higher level of care to our animals. It allows for more individualized care and closer monitoring. Animal welfare is a top priority, if it becomes anything less than that you will not be able to keep the family farm going. Successful family farms depend on high quality animal care.
By ART HOVEY / Lincoln Journal Star Posted: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 8:00 pm
Despite increasing criticism from animal rights and welfare groups, Tim Amlaw doesn't expect to see the gates thrown open in livestock confinement settings in Nebraska and other prominent livestock states.
The typical chicken is not going back to scratching his way across the barnyard and the typical hog is not going back to burying himself up to his snout in his favorite mudhole.
Amid rising worldwide demand for food, "a concentrated system of production is going to be a necessity," Amlaw, based in Colorado as director of the farm animal program for American Humane, said in Lincoln Tuesday.
He expects demand to also dictate production systems "that keep costs reasonably low."
Amlaw's appearance at the 2009 Nebraska Cattlemen Beef Industry Issues Summit comes at a time when new laws in California, Michigan and other states are taking aim at cages for laying hens, gestation crates for pregnant hogs, and other tight spaces used for food animal production.
Read More
Reassuring consumers that our livestock are well cared for is always going to be an important thing. And every farmer or rancher that I know is always trying to make the care of their livestock even better. Modern livestock facilities can offer the higher level of care to our animals. It allows for more individualized care and closer monitoring. Animal welfare is a top priority, if it becomes anything less than that you will not be able to keep the family farm going. Successful family farms depend on high quality animal care.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Ohio Decides Fate of The Agriculture Tomorrow
Issue 2 farming amendment could influence agriculture programs at OSU
By Whittney Smith
smith.5623@osu.edu
Published: Sunday, November 1, 2009
Voters will decide Tuesday whether the state will establish a board to regulate how Ohio’s farmers care for livestock, a decision that might affect Ohio State’s agriculture programs.
Ohio’s agricultural industry lobbied hard to have the amendment added to the Ohio Constitution because some farmers say that is the only way they can stop animal-rights advocates from forcing costly reforms as they have done in six states already. Labeled as Issue 2, the amendment would create a 13-member board that would set standards on how farmers care for livestock.
Issue 2 supporters are afraid the Humane Society of the United States will achieve in Ohio what they accomplished elsewhere if the issue fails. The group opposes certain animal confinement practices and has lobbied in other states for legislation that bans gestation crates for sows and restrictive cages for hens and veal calves. The group has identified Ohio as the next target for such reforms.
OSU President E. Gordon Gee and Bobby Moser, dean of the College of Food, Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, both support the amendment.
“I have read the issue, I have talked to a lot of people about it and I am voting for it,” Gee said during an Oct. 9 taping of Town Hall Ohio, a syndicated program by the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation. Gee said he views Issue 2 as an important opportunity for the university to take a leadership role in animal welfare research and science.
Many agriculture students support the amendment because they fear the efforts by the Humane Society of the United States may limit their employment options if they limit how producers raise livestock.
“Agriculture is my past, present and future,” said Ryan Langenkamp, president of Buckeye Dairy Club. “As a senior in animal science this issue means a lot to me.”
Along with Buckeye Dairy Club, Sigma Alpha and Saddle and Sirloin have launched outreach campaigns on campus through rallies and campus awareness projects. Read More
Tomorrow, Ohio residents will have the opportunity to determine whether their own residents and experts in the field will determine proper livestock handling guidelines or the world’s wealthiest animal rights organization who’s stated goal is to eliminate animal agriculture. This article did a nice job of highlighting how this could impact young people who are planning on returning to production agriculture. If this bill doesn’t pass, the fate of many multi-generational family farms could truly be in jeopardy.
By Whittney Smith
smith.5623@osu.edu
Published: Sunday, November 1, 2009
Voters will decide Tuesday whether the state will establish a board to regulate how Ohio’s farmers care for livestock, a decision that might affect Ohio State’s agriculture programs.
Ohio’s agricultural industry lobbied hard to have the amendment added to the Ohio Constitution because some farmers say that is the only way they can stop animal-rights advocates from forcing costly reforms as they have done in six states already. Labeled as Issue 2, the amendment would create a 13-member board that would set standards on how farmers care for livestock.
Issue 2 supporters are afraid the Humane Society of the United States will achieve in Ohio what they accomplished elsewhere if the issue fails. The group opposes certain animal confinement practices and has lobbied in other states for legislation that bans gestation crates for sows and restrictive cages for hens and veal calves. The group has identified Ohio as the next target for such reforms.
OSU President E. Gordon Gee and Bobby Moser, dean of the College of Food, Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, both support the amendment.
“I have read the issue, I have talked to a lot of people about it and I am voting for it,” Gee said during an Oct. 9 taping of Town Hall Ohio, a syndicated program by the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation. Gee said he views Issue 2 as an important opportunity for the university to take a leadership role in animal welfare research and science.
Many agriculture students support the amendment because they fear the efforts by the Humane Society of the United States may limit their employment options if they limit how producers raise livestock.
“Agriculture is my past, present and future,” said Ryan Langenkamp, president of Buckeye Dairy Club. “As a senior in animal science this issue means a lot to me.”
Along with Buckeye Dairy Club, Sigma Alpha and Saddle and Sirloin have launched outreach campaigns on campus through rallies and campus awareness projects. Read More
Tomorrow, Ohio residents will have the opportunity to determine whether their own residents and experts in the field will determine proper livestock handling guidelines or the world’s wealthiest animal rights organization who’s stated goal is to eliminate animal agriculture. This article did a nice job of highlighting how this could impact young people who are planning on returning to production agriculture. If this bill doesn’t pass, the fate of many multi-generational family farms could truly be in jeopardy.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Animal Testing Saving Dogs & Hopefully People
Lucky Pet Dogs Receive Experimental Cancer Treatments Before Their Humans
By Clay Dillow Posted 10.13.2009
Animal rights activists, take note: when it comes to experimental cancer treatments, American pet dogs are now in line in front of humans, participating in trials that in several cases have destroyed cancers completely.
Dogs experience cancer in ways similar to humans, making them preferable research subjects to lab rats and mice, whose experimental settings are too regimented to reflect a human reaction to cancers. Those human-like reactions have granted dying dogs access to treatments ahead of dying humans in some cases, allaying some ethical fears while stirring up others.
Like humans, dogs suffer from various cancers that spread to form secondaries and grow resistant to drugs over time. Dogs can also relapse just as humans do, giving researchers a much better picture of how effective a drug can be at destroying a particular cancer or sending it into remission. These similarities make dogs ideal candidates for testing of cancer drugs, and as such a group of 19 veterinary institutions currently has 12 different trials underway on groups ranging from 15 to 60 dogs. Read More
This is exactly the type of animal testing that groups like the Animal Liberation Front violently try to stop. Many vegan activists in our country have also opposed any type of animal testing as well. They think this type of thing is cruel and inhumane. They would rather see your pets and you die a painful death from disease than use animals to discover new treatments. It’s important for pet owners to realize this and think about it when they are donating to supposed animal welfare organizations.
By Clay Dillow Posted 10.13.2009
Animal rights activists, take note: when it comes to experimental cancer treatments, American pet dogs are now in line in front of humans, participating in trials that in several cases have destroyed cancers completely.
Dogs experience cancer in ways similar to humans, making them preferable research subjects to lab rats and mice, whose experimental settings are too regimented to reflect a human reaction to cancers. Those human-like reactions have granted dying dogs access to treatments ahead of dying humans in some cases, allaying some ethical fears while stirring up others.
Like humans, dogs suffer from various cancers that spread to form secondaries and grow resistant to drugs over time. Dogs can also relapse just as humans do, giving researchers a much better picture of how effective a drug can be at destroying a particular cancer or sending it into remission. These similarities make dogs ideal candidates for testing of cancer drugs, and as such a group of 19 veterinary institutions currently has 12 different trials underway on groups ranging from 15 to 60 dogs. Read More
This is exactly the type of animal testing that groups like the Animal Liberation Front violently try to stop. Many vegan activists in our country have also opposed any type of animal testing as well. They think this type of thing is cruel and inhumane. They would rather see your pets and you die a painful death from disease than use animals to discover new treatments. It’s important for pet owners to realize this and think about it when they are donating to supposed animal welfare organizations.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Ohio Animal Welfare Symposium
Ohio State October 16 Animal Welfare Symposium Takes Shape
09/23/2009 03:39PM
COLUMBUS, Ohio -- As animal agriculture comes under scrutiny and animal welfare issues are hotly debated, the time to become educated to proactively address animal welfare issues is now.
"Animal welfare is a prominent issue in Ohio and the U.S. and even the world. It's a topic of interest to producers, consumers, veterinarians, health-care professionals, legislators and anyone who has a stake in sustainable animal agriculture," said Naomi Botheras, animal welfare program specialist for Ohio State University Extension in the Department of Animal Sciences. "Because it is such an important topic that affects a lot of people, it's important to become educated about the issue, participate in the conversation and get involved in the decision-making process."
Informed decisions about animal welfare that will positively address the needs of animals, producers and consumers are based on understanding a wide range of perspectives. To better understand and proactively address farm animal welfare issues, the Department of Animal Sciences and the College of Veterinary Medicine are holding an Animal Welfare Symposium, "Building Partnerships to Address Animal Agriculture," on Friday, Oct. 16 at the university's Nationwide and Ohio Farm Bureau 4-H Center, 2201 Fred Taylor Drive, Columbus, Ohio 43210. Well-known animal welfare experts and social scientists from around the world will discuss the scientific, ethical, legal and social contexts embedded in the animal welfare debate.
"The symposium is an opportunity for people to hear a wide range of animal welfare perspectives, hear what other people are doing and discuss what needs to be done. It's also a chance to learn from other countries about how they have handled animal welfare issues, so we don't have to reinvent the wheel or more importantly so we don't make the same mistakes they've made," said Botheras who is co-organizing the event. Read More
One of the biggest problems that animal agriculture has been trying to tackle is educating their consumers about who they are and what they do. Everyone is concerned about livestock being handled properly, especially farmers and ranchers. But for those that have no experience in dealing with livestock, changing practices that they consider to cruel could actually cause the livestock to suffer needlessly. Forums like the one that is being hosted by Ohio State University Extension seek to give everyone an opportunity to listen to the foremost experts in the world so that informed, reasonable decisions can be made.
09/23/2009 03:39PM
COLUMBUS, Ohio -- As animal agriculture comes under scrutiny and animal welfare issues are hotly debated, the time to become educated to proactively address animal welfare issues is now.
"Animal welfare is a prominent issue in Ohio and the U.S. and even the world. It's a topic of interest to producers, consumers, veterinarians, health-care professionals, legislators and anyone who has a stake in sustainable animal agriculture," said Naomi Botheras, animal welfare program specialist for Ohio State University Extension in the Department of Animal Sciences. "Because it is such an important topic that affects a lot of people, it's important to become educated about the issue, participate in the conversation and get involved in the decision-making process."
Informed decisions about animal welfare that will positively address the needs of animals, producers and consumers are based on understanding a wide range of perspectives. To better understand and proactively address farm animal welfare issues, the Department of Animal Sciences and the College of Veterinary Medicine are holding an Animal Welfare Symposium, "Building Partnerships to Address Animal Agriculture," on Friday, Oct. 16 at the university's Nationwide and Ohio Farm Bureau 4-H Center, 2201 Fred Taylor Drive, Columbus, Ohio 43210. Well-known animal welfare experts and social scientists from around the world will discuss the scientific, ethical, legal and social contexts embedded in the animal welfare debate.
"The symposium is an opportunity for people to hear a wide range of animal welfare perspectives, hear what other people are doing and discuss what needs to be done. It's also a chance to learn from other countries about how they have handled animal welfare issues, so we don't have to reinvent the wheel or more importantly so we don't make the same mistakes they've made," said Botheras who is co-organizing the event. Read More
One of the biggest problems that animal agriculture has been trying to tackle is educating their consumers about who they are and what they do. Everyone is concerned about livestock being handled properly, especially farmers and ranchers. But for those that have no experience in dealing with livestock, changing practices that they consider to cruel could actually cause the livestock to suffer needlessly. Forums like the one that is being hosted by Ohio State University Extension seek to give everyone an opportunity to listen to the foremost experts in the world so that informed, reasonable decisions can be made.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)